| Message ID | c81aadcd1d0ee2ad7b321224e826c19d3c2bcb4a.1515094281.git.sandeepsheriker.mallikarjun@microchip.com |
|---|---|
| State | Accepted |
| Delegated to: | Hauke Mehrtens |
| Headers | show |
| Series | [LEDE-DEV,v1,1/1] uboot-at91: fix build after fpu activation | expand |
On 01/04/2018 08:43 PM, Sandeep Sheriker Mallikarjun wrote: > neon and VFPv4 support is added to this target and uboot-at91 build > fails due to TARGET_CFLAGS -mfloat-abi set to hard. as a fix, setting > uboot-at91 CFLAGS -mfloat-abi=soft. > > Signed-off-by: Sandeep Sheriker Mallikarjun <sandeepsheriker.mallikarjun@microchip.com> > --- > package/boot/uboot-at91/Makefile | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/package/boot/uboot-at91/Makefile b/package/boot/uboot-at91/Makefile > index 7c420f1..268b254 100644 > --- a/package/boot/uboot-at91/Makefile > +++ b/package/boot/uboot-at91/Makefile > @@ -88,7 +88,7 @@ UBOOT_TARGETS := \ > define Build/Compile > +$(MAKE) $(PKG_JOBS) -C $(PKG_BUILD_DIR) \ > CROSS_COMPILE=$(TARGET_CROSS) \ > - KCFLAGS="$(filter-out -fstack-protector, $(TARGET_CFLAGS))" > + KCFLAGS="$(filter-out -fstack-protector -mfloat-abi=hard, $(TARGET_CFLAGS)) -mfloat-abi=soft" I am wondering why setting KCFLAGS is needed at all. Setting KCFLAGS is the only difference which should have an impact to the default compile rule from include/u-boot.mk . Hauke
Hi Hauke, Since someone previously had filtered -fstack-protector from $(TARGET_CFLAGS) for a reason and don't wanted to break this by removing it. However I am able to verify uboot booting successfully on sama5d2, sama5d3, sama5d4 Xplained boards and sam9x35ek with both patch. (i.e. patch with UBOOT_MAKE_FLAGS and my patch with adding -mfloat-abi=soft to KCFLAGS). Regards, Sandeep Sheeriker M On 01/04/2018 04:23 PM, Hauke Mehrtens wrote: > On 01/04/2018 08:43 PM, Sandeep Sheriker Mallikarjun wrote: >> neon and VFPv4 support is added to this target and uboot-at91 build >> fails due to TARGET_CFLAGS -mfloat-abi set to hard. as a fix, setting >> uboot-at91 CFLAGS -mfloat-abi=soft. >> >> Signed-off-by: Sandeep Sheriker Mallikarjun <sandeepsheriker.mallikarjun@microchip.com> >> --- >> package/boot/uboot-at91/Makefile | 2 +- >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) >> >> diff --git a/package/boot/uboot-at91/Makefile b/package/boot/uboot-at91/Makefile >> index 7c420f1..268b254 100644 >> --- a/package/boot/uboot-at91/Makefile >> +++ b/package/boot/uboot-at91/Makefile >> @@ -88,7 +88,7 @@ UBOOT_TARGETS := \ >> define Build/Compile >> +$(MAKE) $(PKG_JOBS) -C $(PKG_BUILD_DIR) \ >> CROSS_COMPILE=$(TARGET_CROSS) \ >> - KCFLAGS="$(filter-out -fstack-protector, $(TARGET_CFLAGS))" >> + KCFLAGS="$(filter-out -fstack-protector -mfloat-abi=hard, $(TARGET_CFLAGS)) " > I am wondering why setting KCFLAGS is needed at all. > Setting KCFLAGS is the only difference which should have an impact to > the default compile rule from include/u-boot.mk . > > Hauke
On 01/05/2018 05:43 PM, Sandeep Sheriker wrote: > Hi Hauke, > Since someone previously had filtered -fstack-protector from > $(TARGET_CFLAGS) for a reason and don't wanted to break this by removing > it. However I am able to verify uboot booting successfully on sama5d2, > sama5d3, sama5d4 Xplained boards and sam9x35ek with both patch. (i.e. > patch with UBOOT_MAKE_FLAGS and my patch with adding -mfloat-abi=soft > to KCFLAGS). > > Regards, > Sandeep Sheeriker M I applied your patch now, but I still think the KCFLAGS setting is compelled unneeded, U-Boot has some code which should add the needed compiler settings independently of the build system and we do not need to provide it some special settings. Hauke > On 01/04/2018 04:23 PM, Hauke Mehrtens wrote: >> On 01/04/2018 08:43 PM, Sandeep Sheriker Mallikarjun wrote: >>> neon and VFPv4 support is added to this target and uboot-at91 build >>> fails due to TARGET_CFLAGS -mfloat-abi set to hard. as a fix, setting >>> uboot-at91 CFLAGS -mfloat-abi=soft. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Sandeep Sheriker Mallikarjun >>> <sandeepsheriker.mallikarjun@microchip.com> >>> --- >>> package/boot/uboot-at91/Makefile | 2 +- >>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/package/boot/uboot-at91/Makefile >>> b/package/boot/uboot-at91/Makefile >>> index 7c420f1..268b254 100644 >>> --- a/package/boot/uboot-at91/Makefile >>> +++ b/package/boot/uboot-at91/Makefile >>> @@ -88,7 +88,7 @@ UBOOT_TARGETS := \ >>> define Build/Compile >>> +$(MAKE) $(PKG_JOBS) -C $(PKG_BUILD_DIR) \ >>> CROSS_COMPILE=$(TARGET_CROSS) \ >>> - KCFLAGS="$(filter-out -fstack-protector, $(TARGET_CFLAGS))" >>> + KCFLAGS="$(filter-out -fstack-protector -mfloat-abi=hard, >>> $(TARGET_CFLAGS)) " >> I am wondering why setting KCFLAGS is needed at all. >> Setting KCFLAGS is the only difference which should have an impact to >> the default compile rule from include/u-boot.mk . >> >> Hauke > > > _______________________________________________ > Lede-dev mailing list > Lede-dev@lists.infradead.org > http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/lede-dev
diff --git a/package/boot/uboot-at91/Makefile b/package/boot/uboot-at91/Makefile index 7c420f1..268b254 100644 --- a/package/boot/uboot-at91/Makefile +++ b/package/boot/uboot-at91/Makefile @@ -88,7 +88,7 @@ UBOOT_TARGETS := \ define Build/Compile +$(MAKE) $(PKG_JOBS) -C $(PKG_BUILD_DIR) \ CROSS_COMPILE=$(TARGET_CROSS) \ - KCFLAGS="$(filter-out -fstack-protector, $(TARGET_CFLAGS))" + KCFLAGS="$(filter-out -fstack-protector -mfloat-abi=hard, $(TARGET_CFLAGS)) -mfloat-abi=soft" endef $(eval $(call BuildPackage/U-Boot))
neon and VFPv4 support is added to this target and uboot-at91 build fails due to TARGET_CFLAGS -mfloat-abi set to hard. as a fix, setting uboot-at91 CFLAGS -mfloat-abi=soft. Signed-off-by: Sandeep Sheriker Mallikarjun <sandeepsheriker.mallikarjun@microchip.com> --- package/boot/uboot-at91/Makefile | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)